Comments about ‘Thoughtful veto of sex education bill’

Too bad that more people, especially Democrats and non-Mormons don't realize how
amazing this newspaper truly is when it comes to the national and international
news coverage. However, oddly enough with its budget cutbacks and reduction in
staff, the Deseret News local and state news coverage is seriously lacking. But
from a media market standpoint, together the two newspapers put Utahns in the
unusual position of having to either purchase two subscriptions rather than one
or at least have access to both news outlets so that the public can have good
coverage of the entire spectrum of news: world and national from The Deseret
News and local and state from The Salt Lake Tribune.

Our legislature painted the governor in a corner with this bill. No matter what
action he took, he was going to look bad. He was smart to do this as far from
the Convention as possible and after Caucus night.

If you read the current law first,and then compare it to the proposed law,

I believe you will find that the intent of the current law remains, with
added parental input and an option for the local school not to teach the class
if they don't want to follow the law.

The bill allows a local school
to provide the class if they follow the law. Currently we have schools in Utah
that are required to provide the class and the claim is that some schools are
not following the current law. Some have even questioned if the State School
Board was following the current law.

If that is the case, either the
law needs to be clarified, or we add teeth to the law, or both. HB 363 clarifies
the law assuming the schools will follow the law if it is clear.

If
you look at lines 135 to 140, you will notice the opt in was not removed for
parents.

The movement to shift the content of the class from current
law significantly either way didn't pass. Many that are upset at HB 363 do not
like the current law and wanted to change it to have fewer restrictions.

"Thoughtful veto" For the public school system to even be involved with
anything other than abstention in sex education is a travesty of anything moral
and rational in our society. Those who want the schools to teach all sorts of
aberrations are only contributing to the moral decay of our society.

I appreciate this well-written article on the "whys" behind Governor
Herbert's veto of this bill. Governor Herbert's veto of this bill makes total
sense given the law that is already in place to make sure that parents have a
say as to the scope and extend of their children sex education in the public
school system. The current law works well for most families in our state and so
there is no need to change it.

Growing up in Northern California in the mid-1970s, I remember well the Church
opposing sex education in schools. Along with the other LDS kids in my high
school, I submitted a note from my parents allowing me to be excused from
attending sex ed classes.

It's interesting how the Church over the
past 35 years has done a complete 180 on this issue, now endorsing public sex
education. No longer do they support teaching abstinence, but through its media
arm (KSL and Deseret News) sanction public education teaching our children
regarding sexual options, such as homosexuality, and contraceptive usage.

You toss the Bible and prayer out of schools and instead teach kids
about sex and you wonder why kids are having sex like a pack of animals and no
longer compete in the basics with the rest of the world. Duh.

Thanks
Brethren for endorsing secularism and the sexualisation of our kids. IÂm
now beginning to understand what you mean by referring to our church, through
your Public Affairs Dept, as Âcontemporary Mormonism.Â When you love
public opinion and the praise of man more than the truth, this is exactly what I
would expect.

If people would actually attend or have kids attend sex education classes in
Utah they could speak with a little knowledge on just what this was all about
rather than assume that leadership - in the LDS church or Utah government are
out to "sexualize" our kids or win a secular popularity contest.

How sexually active were youth in the 1940s, when the Bible and prayer were
still allowed in schools? ThatÂs right. They were restrained back then.

The excuses given when I was young was that through education, kids
would be more responsible. The fact is weÂve become a sexually active
society since introducing this topic to the curriculum.

If you teach
kids math, theyÂll understand the subject. If you teach them carpentry,
theyÂll become skilled in that trade. So, it doesnÂt take a genius to
recognize that if you teach kids how to have sex and to detach any stigma to
sexual behavior and normalize others, theyÂll become sexually active.

If this were about teaching kids how to mix drinks, donÂt you think
theyÂd obtain some expertise in that field and, of course, theyÂd
drink more often and at an earlier age? Again, duh.

Well done, D News! I could not agree more with your "thoughtful" stand
on this issue. The failure of parents to speak with their children about
sexuality has led to a plethora of societal problems. If parents can't/won't do
it someone has to. Those who say otherwise have their head in the sand.

MapleDon said:If you teach kids math, theyÂll understand the subject.
If you teach them carpentry, theyÂll become skilled in that trade.

So if you teach a child gun safety, will they treat the gun with respect
because of the knowledge received or with reckless abandon because they know
nothing about how the gun works?

According to your logic if you teach
kids about sex they'll make adult entertainment their profession. Well
I'm afraid the numbers don't favor your logic anymore than sticking
your fingers in your ears and saying na na na ana ana, which is just as helpful
to our children as trying to pretend that a lack of information brings
enlightenment.